What happened
John Ahmed, 42 and a father of four, was a remand prisoner at HMP Manchester. On the morning of 29 July 2015 he was in the prison yard with another prisoner, who was seen to pick up an item and hand it to him.
He was led into a wing corridor to be searched by two prison officers, and a struggle followed. Over about twenty minutes he was subjected to force in three separate locations. Officers moved him between them bent over with his hands behind his back, and held him handcuffed face down on the ground.
In the third period of restraint he began foaming at the mouth and making gurgling noises, then became unresponsive. Officers kept wrist locks on him while they checked his welfare. An ambulance was called and CPR carried out, but he was pronounced dead on arrival at hospital.
The outcome
The inquest ran from 27 February to 29 March 2017 before the senior coroner, Nigel Meadows. The jury found that prison officers used unlawful force against him and that it caused his death. They rejected the officers’ account of violence and aggression, found the force disproportionate at almost every stage, and criticised the failure to de-escalate.
They found it unlawful to keep wrist locks on while checking his welfare, and that the supervising healthcare staff member made no appropriate physical checks.
In June 2024 a former officer was convicted at Minshull Street Crown Court of wilfully making a false statement in judicial proceedings and knowingly using a false document. A second was acquitted.
What went wrong
Three episodes in twenty minutes are one event. Between them he was walked, bent double, hands behind his back, which is not a recovery period. Nobody counted the total, or weighed it against his weight and the length of the struggle.
The welfare check matters most. Wrist locks were still on while he was checked, so the check was done on a person still under restraint, by people with an interest in the restraint being justified.
The account became a second failure. The jury rejected the officers’ description, the coroner referred their evidence to the police, and six years later one was convicted of falsifying it.
Healthcare had no written guidance on its role, which the coroner called untenable. He also raised the absence of CCTV where the restraints happened.
What it teaches
Count the episodes, not the minutes. Three restraints inside twenty minutes leave no recovery time, and the cumulative effect on breathing and on the heart is not the same as three short holds.
A welfare check has to be physical, with hands off. If a wrist lock has to stay on to keep the check safe, the check is not safe.
Questions for the room
- He was moved between three locations, bent over, hands behind his back. What was happening to his breathing?
- You are the officer at his head when he starts foaming at the mouth. What do you do next?
- Who in that corridor owned the total duration, rather than their own part of it?
Evidence and limits
Confidence: confirmed. INQUEST’s account of the inquest conclusion and the Manchester Evening News report of the 2024 trial were both read. The INQUEST release carries the jury’s findings; the newspaper carries the conviction. The ITV News Granada report returned a connection error and was not read.
The record establishes the conviction, not the sentence. Sentencing was listed for 25 July 2024 and its outcome is not in the sources held, so no sentence is stated. No officer is named, including the one convicted, because the record does not name him.
Our vulnerable and volatile persons training covers de-escalation, and what has to happen before hands are used.
Sources
Reviewed 20 October 2026.